The Sun. — London, England, 1836-07-02 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The appetite with which Tory Lords, spiritual and temporal, devour every tale, no matter how frivo lous, absurd, or unfounded, which may be invented by the enemies of the peace of Ireland against the eneastAfts of the present Government, is most amazing. It matters not how palpably false the accusation against the Reforming Government or its subalterns, the Tory Peers and Prelates can stomach it all. How many calumnious stories have not Lords Roden and Wicklow, and the Bishop of Exeter, retailed in the Upper House during the last two or three years, with a view to injure the limited, but, as far as it goes, most beneficial system of national education which a Whig Ministry established in the sister country, upon the ruins of that pernicious and fraudulent plan which the Kildare-place Cantzuells turned to the most mischievous account for so many years ! All these fables have been believed by the Tory Lords and the fanatics to whom they were addressed ; and yet, not one case of established delinquency on the part of the Government, or of the Board in Dublin, or of its underlings in the provinces, have all or either of the calumniators of the new system attempted to produce, in support of all their fictions. Even last night, when the modest " Narcissus" let his small-beer ora tory flow over, he did not venture to allege anything in the form of criminatoryfict against the system of na tional education, or the Board of Management. There was, as a matter of course, vapid declamation and ac cusation founded upon hearsay ; somebody, not named, said to some other nameless person, that in some parish or place not specified, some schoolmaster in some school, of the name of which we are, left in profound ignorance, expounded the Catholic prayers to the children, and made them put a cross to their names. Is this mode of warfare upon the Govern ment and their measures to be endured ? If these factious Peers and Prelates have any specific charge to bring against the Board of National Education— which consists of the Protestant Duke of Lein ster, the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, the Presbyterian Dr. Carlisle, and the Presbyte rian Mr. Holmes, as well as the Catholic Dr. Murray—why do they not prefer the accusation as becomes men ? They are not afraid that such a charge would be ungraciously receiv e d i n th e House of Lords. Wherefore, ° then, this vile persistance in the mean and despicable mode which has been adopted of insinua ting false charges, and hinting shabby accusations, which cannot be met and confuted, and the authors and retailers of which are sheltered from exposure and the reprobation of the country, because an opportunity is withheld from the accused of esta blishing - their own innocence and the baseness of their accusers ! The people of England will see in Lord Lansdowne's speech a merciless exposure of the unprincipled means resorted to by the in tolerant enemies of Irish improvement, mental as well as physical, in order to prevent the Parliament from encouraging the only plan of moral culture which has ever yet been introduced into Ireland, with a sincere view to the regeneration of that country, and the so cial improvement of its people ; and never was there an instance in which the maxim ex uno disce omnes was so applicable. The Bishop of Exeter's charge against a school in the Queen's county, in union with the National Board, is now proved to be a calumny ; and equally slanderous, and, we fear, intentionally un true, are all the other accusations that have been pre ferred ; but so as to cover the falsehood-mongers with impunity, against that Board. In this country no conception can be formed of the rabid malignity with which the Tories, lay and clerical, of Ireland have assailed this Board, from the first hour of its ex istence down to the present moment, the brief interval of the Peel usurpation of 1834-5 excepted. While the reins of Government rested in Tory hands, the piety of Lord Roden, the rancour of the Right Rev. Pamphleteer, and the phrenzy of Lord Winchilsea—to say nothing of the modesty of the Earl cf Wicklow—were suf fered to " sleep in the shade." Not a word was then heard or whispered against the " bible-burk ing," " scripture-mutilating," " Popery-cherishing," " unchristian," " blasphemous," " deistical Board" of national education. All was silence then, for the candid S,r Robert felt the necessity of an attempt to cheat the Liberals, by playing a delusive game in Ireland ; and Sir Henry Hardingc actually pledged the usurpers to an increase of the funds of the Board. But, as if to establish their own perfidy beyond the reach of cavil, no sooner did the usurping Minieters deecend into the rank of his Majesty's Opposition, than the bigots resumed the howl against the system of national education, which they have untiringly kept up to this hour. In the Senate, in the pulpit, in the place of public meeting, this system has been the in exhaustible theme of rancorous invective and calum nious abuse. Yet the reviled Board have gone on doing eleat good ; and the success they have reaped from their labours is the hest evidence of the excel lence of their system and of its applicability to time condition of Ireland. Enlarged means and machinery arc alone wanting to make that system more popular and more useful.—Morning Chronicle. Mr. Gaskell's speech on Thursday night was one of those truth-telling, straight-forward, unmanageable declarations of a political sentiment pervading the whole mass of English intelligence and pubic princi ple throughout this entire kingdom, which must at all times wither to the very core a factious and fabricated system of political warfare such as that exhibited on the same occasion by disappointed and chopfallen intriguers in office, and incendiaries who would be there if they could. The affected calmness of Lord John Russell—the affected confidence of Mr. Spring Rice, as to what another session would accomplish—and the affected blustering of Mr. Daniel O'Connell, were all but so many signs of self-evident mortification, at the death-blow given to their common scheme by the unflinching wisdom of the Upper [louse of Parlia ment. " Great good," quoth the Chancellor of the Exchequer, " had already been done for Ireland, and to the cause of further amelioration they might hope' to gain fresh converts." Now, quere amelioration? Have the Lords rejected any one measure with regard to Ireland which was clearly calculated to ameliorate the condition, or to promote the views, of any por tion of the " people of Ireland," but of those who fatten on the discontents and wretchedness of that people ? Is there a single point established with re gard to the Municipal measure which the Lords have quashed but that its enactment would have afforded the priests a more extended field for their tyranny over conscience, and to the demagogues fresh pabulum for agitation ? But the Lords have passed other mea sures, according to Mr. Rice, for the " good of Ire land, and therefore they will pass this." If the Lords have passed other measures, and rejected this, there is manifest ground for conjecturing that there is some thing in this which renders it, acc or di ng to t h e judg mente, of the Lords, inexpedient as a measure of State policy for Ireland. Mr. Daniel O'Connell boasted, with his usual species and amount of courage, that he would renew (why renew what has never been relaxed ?) that organized turbulence which goes by the wild name of agitation. So let him. If Ireland is never to be substantially at peace—if hatred against all existing laws and authorities is to be for ever kept up on false pretences—if the spirit of bullying the Legislature, and convulsing the realm, is to be invariably fomented and brought to bear against the monarchy, by men who avow their detestation of that monarchy, but at the same time their conviction that its ruin will be most securely and rapidly com pleted by avoiding, on their part, the extremity of civil war, we say without reserve, that the sooner O'Connell cae so excite his Irish rabble as to lose the power of restraining them within lawful bounds, and thereby to bring . the battle to a crisis, and to make O'Connell a fugitive, the better for the integrity of the British Em pire, and for the permanent well-being of the State. The vantage ground possessed by the Agitator now is, that the nominal King's Ministers arc the wil ling,, ministers of Popish despotism, and therefore to a certain point, the tools of his machina tions. The counter benefit to the State is this— that lip j ,,,and they will fall, infallibl y , together. Tlici:siselOollloi s this bragging mounteb an k, in one ieipec6 Nyais fiprAlly exposed by Mr. Gaskell, w'ho erided and".*ikV . , e slanderous absurdity that the Vle o.E,h_edn . l' . , re with - O'Connell in the ( war he ' .- fts - early,t%, against the House of Lords. 7. 1 6100 . 6 thapOOtle of England" have the mean s . - '4 , ic . o - --4,.. • ,,. ./,;, ---- ' 4/ J 4 THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 2, 1536. of showing what are their real and habitual senti ments, whether by county elections or at incidental op portunities, they prove their unfeigned attachment to the principles supported by the Peerage. If any 20 counties of England and Wales were now thrown open to the chances of a new election, we have no doubt that 15 out of the 20 (take them by lot, or how you will) would return anti-Whigs to Parliament, and by majorities in no degree short of that which has stripped Sir Gray Skipwith of his plumage. But Mr. Daniel O'Connell, it seems, is to carry the House of Lords by storm, as an outwork to the citadel of the Esta blished Church. We wish him no worse fate than to embark seriously in such a contest ; but this topic we reserve for another day.—Times. The Ministerial Journals continue to threaten the House of Lords with the vengeance in store for them, ' in consequence of their refusal to " register the decree" for the establishment of " normal schools of agitation" in Ireland. One of those Papers—an evening organ of the Treasury—commenced an article last night, containing a good deal of silly vapouring and rhodo montade on this subject, with the following grave and significant warning, which, no doubt, will cause the Lords - to tremble for their coronets, the forfeiture of which is the least punishment they can suffer for the crime of maintaining their Legislative indepen dence :—" The Lords, doubtless, have well weighed the consequences of the step which they have taken, and are prepared to encounter them. They have pro voked a collision, the whole results of which few are able to foresee, and we suppose they would not have entered upon the contest without a full assurance of victory. Patriotic they doubtless are, and some of them at least ought to be, for they are well paid for it ; but we confess we can hardly imagine any of them dying in the breach in defence of the privileges of their Order, or even of the abuses by which they most profit." There is something fearfully solemn in the whole of this passage. The words "the Lords doubtless have well weighed the consequences of the step which they have taken, and are prepared to encounter them," have a terrible significancy. But supposing the Lords have not weighed the consequences of the step which they have taken, their case must be still worse. For the ordinary sins of their Lordships the speeches of a Melbourne in the House and of an O'Connell out of it might be considered punishment enough, but it is clear the noble and hereditary legislators have com mitted a crime for which neither the dull declamation of the one or the licentious abuse of the other is con sidered a sufficient infliction. The Treasury writer ex ' presses himself very gravely sceptical as to whether the delinquent Peers are prepared to " die in defence of their privileges." Now the solution of the problem, whether they are prepared to die or not, would be of very little consequence if it were not in tended to bring the question to an issue which would put their courage on that point to the test. If so, we trust the descendants and successors of the ancient Barons of England—the restorers of those Saxon liberties, which had been swept away by the Norman conquest, will not prove themselves degene rate from their predecessors. We have not heard that they have " a vow registered in Heaven" as an ex cuse for " hanging the calf's skin on their recreant limbs" when the day of the threatened struggle ar rives ; but we do not think the truculent allusion of the Treasury writer means any thing more than has been meant by all the other harmless gasconade which has been so often, of late, played off against the House of Lords, but played off in vain. The concluding pas sage of the article to which we have referred, and which we only notice because it may be considered a Ministerial manifesto, is in the following words : " Whatever, then, may be the immediate result of the struggle which has commenced—however the opera tions of Government may be embarrassed, and the busi ness of the nation impeded, its end is certain. The Lords must yield--and they must yield at last in such a manner as to compensate the people for the delay which they have occasioned, and the inconvenience which that delay has produced—they will find, when it is too late, how dearly they have paid for their whistle." In our humble opinion, and we are glad to find the House of Lords impressed with the same sentiment, it is better that Ministers should be embarrassed than the Government of Ireland should be delivered up, beyond redemption, to the misrule of the priestly and political agitators, to whom Ministers are desirous of turning it over. These very agitators pledged them selves ill the face of the world that the concession of the Roman Catholic claims would tranquilize Ire land, and be the panacea of all its evils ; but never, except ifi time of actual rebellion, was agitation so rife and fierce as it has been ever since the concession of those claims. Let it not be forgotten that the measure of unqualified.- emancipation was carried, against the sense of the decided majority of the people of England, by a boroughmongering Parliament, which thus fur nished one of the strongest practical arguments possi ble in favour of Reform. We believe, and all recent elections show it, that the decided majority of the people of England at present approve of the con duct of the House of Lords in manfully resisting the attempts of Mr. O'Connell and the Whig Ministry to follow up a measure which conferred reli gious and political equality by other measures for the establishment of a Papal ascendancy in Ireland. The agitators have done their utmost to excite the feelings of the people of this country against the Lords,, now the guardians of the Consti tution, and of the rights of the poorer classes, which the democratic party are willing enough to trample in the dust. The people have remained provokingly quiet, notwithstanding the stimulating appeals of re creant Whigs and licentious demagogues. They have only bestirred themselves of late, when called upon to exercise the elective franchise, and surely the result of those appeals to the people ought to satisfy Ministers that, in crouching to the insolent dominion of the man whom Lord Grey's Government denounced, even in the Speech from the Throne, they have lost that po pular support which Lord Grey's Government re ceived. Let them not flatter themselves with the idle notion that the Lords will yield. They will not enter into a' degrading treaty like that which was ratified at Lichfield House. They will not betray their high national trust ; they will not capitulate to the enemies of the Constitution.—Morning Herald. We had yesterday the satisfaction (a satisfaction exclusively our own) of laying before our readers the well-digested and unanswerable reasons of the House of Lords for refusing to concur in the Bill as recon structed by the House of Commons for establishing a new system of local administration in Ireland. This Bill has been improperly and fraudulently called a Bill for reforming the corporations of Ireland. The misnomer is calculated to excite disgust in the mind of every man who knows what the purport of the Bill, as sent back from the Commons to the Lords, really was, and what its practical effect must have been. The Bill was not a Bill for reforming the Corpo rations of Ireland. It was a Bill to establish in twelve of the cities and towns of Ireland a system of local Government perfectly new in that country, having no other recommendation in its favour than that it would have served in those towns—the most popular and excitable towns in that division of the Empire—as a convenient instrument of agitation. With respect to all the other corporate towns of Ireland the Bill left them in respect to local government just as they are, with the exception of twenty, in which it made a system compulsory that the rate-payers, having had the option for some years of adopting or rejecting, have very generally rejected. This was a promising subject for collision be tween the two Houses of Parliament I The col lision, truly ! Where is now the collision ? Where has it been, except in the unread or disregarded columns of the Whig and Radical journals ? Or, perhaps, the intemperate and senseless speeches de livered on Thursday night by Mr. Hum e and Mr. O'Connell constitute the collision ? Collision in this case is, no doubt, a very bad thing—odious in the extreme to all persons of decent feeling and correct taste. But, fortunately, the evil of it may be escaped in a mode much less dangerous and costly than that of es t a bli s hi ng throughout Ireland " nor mal schools of agitation." Members of the House of Commons can find refuge from tiresome folly at Bellamy s, and the readers of newspapers can indulge themselves in the luxury of skipping. We shall set a salutary example here, by treating the apostles of collision, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Hume, and their fol lowers, with the contempt they deserve. What they say goes for nothing, inasmuch as they have chosen to occupy a position which divides them from the intel ligent and reflecting portion of the people of Eng land, and which cannot be maintained without the continual exhibition of extravagance, absurdity, and vice. Our taste and judgment would lead us to the same course with respect to Lord John Russell's and Mr. Spring Rice's orations on this subject. But these gentlemen are unhappily something more than mob orators and tyrannical collectors of unwilling alms. They are Ministers of the Crown, and what they say in that capacity, however inferior they may be in individual importance even to Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Hume, cannot with propriety be disregarded. We can only characterise the speeches of these Ministers as the speeches of very shallow persons, utterly re gardless of what they said, provided they could con trive to escape out of an immediate difficulty. They pretend to be supporting the principle of popular Government in the local administration of the towns of Ireland, in opposition to the House of Lords, when the fact notoriously is, that their Bill was not calculated to establish in those towns any other go vernment than the tyranny of the Roman Catholic priests and demagogues, and that, such as it was, it applied to no more than twelve of the towns in Ireland, in which municipal elections and discussions would most surely contribute their mischievous aid to the cause of political agitation. These Ministers pretend to find in the reasons of the Lords for the rejection of the pernicious and fraudulent clauses of the Bill before the House, an indication that the objections of the House of Lords will speedily be overcome by the perseverance of the House of Commons, supported by the people. It suited the purpose of Lord John Russell and Mr. Hume to overlook the question whether the Minis ' terial project of Irish Corporation Reform is supported now, or has the least chance to be supported hereafter, by the people of England. This question, which lays at the very basis of all their easy and confident assumptions, they did not find it convenient to exa mine. It is a question the answer to which we prefer to collect from the results of recent elections in Great Britain, rather than from the convenient as. sumptions of Lord John Russell and Mr. Spring. Rice. Let them, we say, refer to the results of re cent elections, and let them then, if they can, find confidence to say, that the people of Great Britain coincide with them on the leading questions of national policy ? The omission of all allusion to the sense of the people as manifested by their mode of exercising the elective franchise is instructive and amusing. It is easier and more convenient to take for granted that the people of England vote at elections in opposition to their real sentiments than to say in the presence of Mr. O'Connell and his formidable tail that their sentiments and those of the people of Eng land do not agree. And Lord John Russell and Mr. S. Rice are not the men to prefer truth and reason to convenience and ease. From the subdued tone and the shallow artifices to which Ministers have been reduced, after the silly vapouring in which they and their partizans indulged on the subject of collision, the people of Great Britain must derive the useful lesson that by performing their duty at elections as they have done on some recent occasions, with diligence and vigour, they may contribute to restrain, within the limits of reason, sense, and honesty, even such States men as Lord John Russell and Mr. S. Rice.— Morning Post. We most earnestly call the attention of the Parlia mentary supporters of a liberal Administration, to the exertions which their opponents are at this moment making to break down their majority in the impend ing division on the appropriation clause of the Irish Church Bill. We have often found it necessary to notice the perfect organization and indefatigable dili gence by which the Conservatives endeavour to com pensate for their numerical inferiority, and in no one instance has that organization and diligence been more strenuously put in requisition than on the present occasion. In addition to the circulars which issued from the Carlton Club upon all important occasions, the most urgent letters are addressed to individuals from influential members of that establishment, call ing on them, in the most impassioned language, to exert themselves. From one of these documents, with a sight of which we have been favoured, we give an extract, and we are assured that its language is mu= Berate, compared with that of other similar epistles : " I do entreat you to postpone all considerations of per sonal inconvenience on this great occasion—the last rampart of Conservatism is to be again assailed by this nefarious appropriation clause. I solemnly de clare to you, that did I even believe my life would be endangered by the exertion, I should not suffer that consideration to weigh a feather in the scale." We have already said that this specimen of Tory dragoon ing is to be considered moderate in comparison with innumerable others that have been despatched in every direction. The hired Swiss of the Conservative Press, too, are stimulated to exertion by all those dirty in ducements which experience has taught their cor rupters to be irresistible, and their columns will be found to bear daily testimony to their eagerness to earn their disgraceful wages. The veteran abettors of corruption, the enzerite of Toryism, are in full activity labouring in their vocations—Holmes scolds and Bonham sputters, Praed writes lampoons and Charles Ross distributes them—that canny Scot Sir George Clerk wheedles, and the Peel and Chandos proteg6, the dapper Sir Thomas Freemantle, is as busy as if the Treasury was again about to open to receive him. We entreat the genuine assertors of liberal principles not to permit themselves to be taken by surprise by the manoeuvres of these spurious apostles of an apostate faction. The Reformers possess an undisputed superiority in the House of the Represen tatives of the People, and supported as they are and will be by the immense preponderance of moral weight which the devotion of their countrymen affords, they can have nothing to apprehend from a struggle, the parties to which are on one side the mercenary adhe rents of a sinecure Church, and on the other the un bought suffrage of " the universal British nation." We have no doubt,—none whatever,—that the divi sion on Monday will show an increasing majority.— Morning Advertiser. Mademoiselle Rapp, the daughter of the old Gen. Rapp, who played so distinguished a part during the career of Napoleon, is about to be led to the hymeneal altar by Mr. Adrian Hope, the brother of Mr. Henry Thomas Hope. The late grand fete in Mansfield-street was given for the purpose of introducing this highly-accomplished lady into the circles of fashion. • JAMES'S NAVAL HISTORY, IN ONE SHILLING Numnens.—This National Work, which has obtained a Euro pean reputation, being referred to by naval officers of all coun tries as a high authority; and which places the heroic deeds of our gallant tars upon the firm basis of unassailable truth, is now, by the admirable plan of cheap periodical publication, placed within the reach of all. This work will now be the companion, not merely of our sailors, but indeed of every Eng lishman. A greater proof of the high estimation in which it is held cannot be afforded than by the fact that it is consulted by the highest personage in the State, who retains for the " wooden walls" all the affection of his youth. In order to accommo date different classes of subscribers, the publisher has judi ciously adopted two modes of publication, viz., a monthly issue in half volumes, price ss. each ; and a weekly delivery in Shilling Numbers. The work, when completed, will be the same in all respects, in extent, number of illustrations, and price. FATAL ACCIDENT.—On Friday last a poor boy, named Joseph Yates, who had been sent to prevent some poultry from getting into the mowing grass, at the farm of Mr. James Offley, at Pattingham, was found with his body and clothes entangled with a horizontal spindle belonging to a thrashing-machine, which was at work, and driven by a water-wheel. The poor little sufferer, who was only nine years of age, was dead when discovered, and bad his legs, his arms, and his thighs broken, and three holes in his head. No person was by when the accident occurred.—Wolver hampton Chronicle of Wednesday. FEMALE BEAUTY is alone to be attained and pre served by Vincent's Gowland's Lotion. This entirely inno cent balsamic lotion produces a beautiful roseate complexion, and a clear, white brilliant skin, thoroughly cleansing all dis colouration, every imperfection and coarseness, and imparting the transparency and bloom of beauty. It preserves the com plexion from the heat and rays of the sun and dust, and to fa milies travelling, enjoying excursions, promenading, &c., is indispensable to comfort and attraction. It immediately allays any unpleasant heat of the face, all i n fl ammat i on, parc h e d ski n , & c ., diffusing a delightful refreshi ng coo l ness . I t tota lly eradicates all cutaneous eruptions, tan, sun-bur ns , f rec kles, spots, redness, &c. Gentlemen after sha v i ng w ill fi n d it cooling and grateful. Prices 2s. 9d., ss. 6d., and Bs. 6d. Observe the signature " M. E. Vincent" on the label, and " Robert Sh aw , 33, Queen-street, Cheapside," engraved on the Government Stamp. Sold by all respectable medicine venders, perfumers and druggists. Ask for Vincent's Gow land's Lotion. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 1. The House was occupied till near six o'clock in hearing evidence on the Stafford Disfranchisement Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR. at that hour took his scat on the Woolsack. The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented a petition from the Protestant Dissenters worshipping in Dollier-street, Dublin, praying for an enquiry into the number and ma nagement of religious houses in Ireland, and against any further grant to Maynooth College. Mr. BERNAL and others brought up a number of private Bills from the Commons. Earl WICKLOW presented a petition from the Vicar and Protestants of Rathmolin, praying that the House would not sanction any grant of money for the purpose of increasing the funds of the Board of Education in Ireland, before a minute inquiry had been instituted into the manner of its working. He was surprised at the opposition given to the motion of the Rev. Prelate (Exeter) in a former pe riod of the session. Government ought to have been the first to support such a motion, if the statements then made could be contradicted. If such things as were then stated were true, it surely was not possible that such a system should be sanctioned by a British House of Parliament. The Re port of the Commissioners said the system was working well, because a portion of Protestant clergymen were applicants for grants—that mode of reasoning was absurd. They should have taken the proportion of Pro testant and Catholic scholars. That would not have been correct, but it would have had a show of reason. This system having been established, he was most anxious to have it continued, for he felt that the Kildare-place Society would not again do the good which they were doing when they were suppressed. He was most anxious that the Government would attempt to get the sanction and assistance of the Protestant clergy. He was most anxious to have inquiry, in order to ascertain what the abuses of the system were, and have the system purified. The prejudices of the clergy might be over come, and then the system might be the means of much good. With these observations, he would move that the petition be laid on the table. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE denied the truth of many of the statements in the petition, particularly those which alleged that copies bad been used for the boys in one of the schools of a seditious character. The Bishop of EXETER explained. He had not stated that the school was a pet school of the Noble Mar quis, or under his patronage. What he had said was, that he believed it would be found that in a school on the Noble Marquis's estate that an incident had occurred under the pa tronage of the agent of the Noble Marquis. The Right Rev. Prelate seeing a Noble Duke in his place (Leinster) wished • to know when the House might expect to have laid on the table a copy of the report of the Commissioners of Education in Ireland ? The Duke of LEINSTER had written for it, but had not yet received it. ' The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, if he had been I aware that this discussion would have arisen, he would have brought down a letter from the agent to whom the Right Rev. Prelate had alluded, in which he stated the facts which he (the Marquis of Lansdowne) had repeated, and, furthermore, expressed his willingness to affirm them upon oath. ) The petition was then ordered to lie upon the table. THE FACTORY SYSTEM. The Bishop of EXETER rose to present three peti tions on this very important subject. The first was from 1 the master-spinners and manufacturers of Bradford, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, the result of the deli berations of a meeting called by public advertisement, and expressing the opinions of a great majority of the persons who attended it. The second was from the dele gates of t i ie workmen in districts in Yorkshire and part of Lancashire. The third must be received as the petition of a single individual, inasmuch as it was merely signed by the chairman of a meeting of operatives from Huddersfield, Halifax, and a variety of other places. All the petitions prayed their Lordships to pass a Bill provid ing that the hours of actual labour in factories for all per sons under twenty-one years of age should not exceed ten hours a-day for five days in the week, and eight on Satur day, with a restriction also on the moving power. When no less a proportion than two-thirds of the whole popula tion were employed in this manner, he was quite sure their Lordships would feel that the interest and rights of so large a number of persons required the most serious considera tion. It was, however, an unfortunate and a melancholy fact, not merely that the condition of the factory children, but that the moral interests of the whole manufacturing population, had never been dealt with as their most incal culable importance demanded.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He would not enter into any of the details of misery and vice which had been given in evidence before commit tees of Parliament, and he willingly spared their Lord ships the pain of listening to them. He would merely say' that it appeared from a return recently made, that in one town alone, the town of Manchester, no fewer than 8,000 children had been, in the short space of four months (so we understood), deserted by their parents, and found help less in the streets. Within the last few weeks masters had been convicted in penalties before the magistrates for em ploying five young persons for thirty-four hours consecu tively without allowing them any time for sleep, with the exception of four hours, during which they were allowed to rest their bodies. Their Lordships would bear in mind that all the petitioners prayed for was, that some restraint should be imposed upon the hours of labour. He knew it would be said that this was a very extensive prayer, in asmuch as it went to the abandonment of a principle—the principle of freedom of labour. It was said that if a man did not like the labour lie was called upon to perform, he was free to go away. What freedom was this when the alternative was starvation, there being such a superabund ance of labour that the manufacturers were enabled to in sist upon their own terms? This protection was only prayed for minors. He might remind their Lordships that rich minors could find guardians and protectors in the State. There was a vast amount of medical evidence taken from the metropolis and the provinces, which went to the full extent of declaring, that even ten hours a day was too great an amount of labour to be imposed upon young children. From a list he held in his hand he found that the greatest cotton spinner in Scotland, Mr. Dunn, of Duntocher, and Mr. Wood, of Bradford, the greatest worsted-spinner in Eng land, had voluntarily adopted the ten-hour restriction in their own mills, from a sense of duty. There was another name to be included in this list—the name of Mr. Fielden, a Member of the House, one of the representatives of Old ham. From this gentleman he greatly differed ;he avowed himself a Radical Reformer, but he was not on that account the less deserving of his (the Bishop of Exeter's) respect and veneration. He was the only Radical Reformer he had ever heard of who had begun by carrying reform into his own business and employment. He had a vast pro perty embarked in a very large concern—property so vast, that if its amount were stated it would appear incredible. Mr. Fielden had not only been Willing to hazard all in the cause of humanity, but when the subject was under discus sion in another' place he had had the magnanimity to ex claim, " If the question be between the stability of manu factures and justice to these poor children, I throw manu factures to the wind." Before this magnanimous declara tion, the celebrated one of a Right Hon. Gentleman, now no more, Mr. Wyndham, " Perish commerce, but live the Constitution," faded into insignificance.—(Hear, hear.) Viscount MELBOURNE, without enterin g into the . general subject, merely begged to say that on hearing the Right Rev. Prelate's statement about the 8,000 deserted children in Manchester he had made immediate inquiry touching its accuracy, of an individual nearly connected with that part of the country, who assured him that it was grossly inaccurate when quoted for such a purpose, inas much as it comprised all the children who were found lost or strayed in the streets, and were then taken to the police office, from whence they were restored to their parents.— (Hear, and a laugh The Bishop of EXETER could only say that in the district of Salford alone no fewer than 470 children had been deserted by their parents within four months. He might take that opportunity of saying that he held in his hand a paper, dated on the 2.3 d of last month—just the period when a collision between the two Houses was apprehended— r in which, by way of throwing the odium of this system upon their Lordships, were the following remarks :—" The clauses in the Act providing for the education of the factory children were mutilated very much, if we remember right, in the House of Lords ; and neither the Commons nor the Govern ment can be responsible for the alterations which pro tanto marred its efficiency." The fact was, that the Noble Lord (whose name could never be mentioned with too much respect), who had introduced the Bill elsewhere, had endeavoured in vain to get it through the House—that he was at last compelled to give it up to the Government — that they altered the whole of its provisions —that when it came up to their Lordships one Committee reported in fa vour of the. principle, and another (composed by a majo rity of two to one of Noble Lords on the Ministerial side of the House) in favour of the details—and that it was ultimately passed with only such amendments as rendered a provision clear and efficient which would otherwise have been useless and ridiculous. It was, in fact, the measure of the Government of 1833. The petitions were ordered to lie upon 'the table., The Earl of HADDINGTON presented a petition from the parish of St. Peter, Dublin, against the construc tive clauses of the Irish Municipal Bill. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE gave notice that he should move the second reading of the English Tithe Bill on Thursday next, and that if their Lordships agreed to the motion, he should propose an interval of a few days before going into Committee. The Petty Sessions (Ireland) Bill went through a Com , mittee, and the report was ordered to be received on Monday next. The report on the Prisoners' Counsel Bill was postponed until Friday. The Bills on the table were forwarded a stage, and their Lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JULY 1. The SPEAKER took the chair at the usual hour. On the motion of Mr. TOOKE, the Earl of Courtoun's Estate Bill was read a third time and passed. On the motion of Captain ALSAGER, the South Me tropolitan Cemetery Bill was read a second time. On the motion of Captain GORDON, the Dempsters' Estate Bill was read a second time. On the motion of Sir S. WHALLEY, the Lords' Amendments to the Grand Junction Railway Bill were agreed to. Mr. OSWALD brought up the Report on Milliken's Estate Bill, which was read a third time and passed. Mr. WILKS presented petitions from the Wesleyan Methodists of Sittingbourne and Milton, praying for the Abolition of Church Rates. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON presented a petition from an individual named Hulme, for an alteration of the Grand Jury Laws. Also a petition from the inhabitants of Cork, signed by 1,500 persons, complaining of his Majesty's Go vernment in Ireland having set aside the election made by the Citizens of Cork of their Municipal Officers for the pre sent year. The petitioners considered the conduct that had been pursued whimsical and arbitrary, and such as might well be complained of. Sir W. BRABAZON presented a petition from Mayo, praying for the total abolition of tithes ; also, a petition from the inhabitants of Killassa, imploring the House to in terpose their prerogative, and avert the calamitous conse quences which must necessarily result from such mischievous proceedings, by a total extinction of that Irish blood-letting and unjust impost " the tithes." As the subject was to come under the consideration of the House to-night, he begged to call the particular attention of the House to the prayer of these petitions, one of which emanated from a county containing a population of half a million of inhabi tants, and which was unanimously consented to by persons of all religious persuasions. FACTORIES BILL. Mr. WAKLEY presented two petitions from Ashton under. Line, and another place, praying for a Ten Hours' Bill ; also a petition from a Benefit Society of London, praying the privilege of employing their own servants. Also a petition from Lieutenant Colonel Horne, praying for en quiry into his case. Mr. G. BARRY presented a petition, but from the low tone in which the Hon. Member spoke, we could not collect the subject of the petition, or the place from whence it came. POOR LAWS FOR IRELAND. Mr. FINN presented a petition from a parish in Queen's County praying for the introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland ; also one from Ballynakill in the same county praying for the abolition of Tithes ; and 9 peti tions to the same effect from parishes in the county of Kilkenny signed by 7,157 persons.—(Hear, hear.) In the year 1731 the Protestants in Kilkenny amounted to 1,880. By the census, in 1831 they had decreased to 1,586. In the former year the Catholics were 5,860, while they now had increased to '22,101. That was the natural re sult of the system of persecution which was pursued in Ireland. He begged to move for the monthly return of outrages committed in Ireland, as made to the Government by the Inspectors of Police. He believed there would be no opposition to the return. Colonel PERCEVAL was sorry that no Member of the Irish Government was present, for he (Colonel Perce val) believed there could be no such return made, as the Government being afraid of allowing the number of out rages to be known, gave orders to the Inspectors. Mr. FINN rose amidst loud cries of " Order, order!" He would not detain the House a moment. He would withdraw the motion now, and make it again when some member of the Government was present. Colonel PERCEVAL did not think it was fair on be half of the Hon. Member to interrupt him, as he had done, in the middle of his speech. He hoped the Speaker would have the goodness to state, for the instruction of the House, whether it was competent for the Hon. Member to step forward as he had done to prevent his exercising his pre rogative in that House ? The SPEAKER thought as the Hon. Member had expressed a desire to. withdraw his motion, that the subject should not be discussed further. The motion was then withdrawn. _ Mr. MAXWELL presented petitions from different parts of Scotland, praying for an alteration in the Law of Conveyancing, and the Statute Labour Act ; also, a peti tion from the hand-loom weavers of Perth and Norwich, praying the House to legislate for their relief. Dlr. BELL presented a petition from the Joint Stock Banking Companies of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, complaining of the Select Committee on Joint Stock Banks. Mr. LEADER presented a petition from Bridgewater, praying the House not to agree to the Lords' Amendments to the Irish Municipal Bill. PARISH CLERKS. Lord SA NDON presented a petition from certain pa rish-clerks of Liverpool, praying the House to grant them compensation in case the Bill for the registration of Wills and Marriages should pass. CORPORATIONS OF SCOTLAND. Captain G.QIIDON presented a petition from the Cor poration of Traffickers of Leith, against the Bill for the regulation of the Municipal Corporations in Scotland. The Hon. and Gallant Member presented a petition from the merchants, traders, and others engaged in the herring fishery of Scotland, praying the House to take measures to promote their interests in all treaties with Foreign Powers. CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Mr. D. W. H ARVEY rose to present a petition from an individual which was in every way entitled to the consi deration of the House, inasmuch as it was the petition of a working clergyman who was very ill paid, and laboured hard. It was the petition of the Rev. Charles Collier, vicar of Humbleton in the county of Rutland, and the state ment of the petition peculiarly merited the attention of the House at a time when they heard so much of the doc trine of appropriation, and when there was so much laudable solicitude evinced that the revenues of the Church should be appropriated to their original purpose. The pe titioner stated that in 1822 he was inducted to the living, that it was of the annual value of 1501., and that the value of the tithes originally derived for religious purposes exceeded the sum of 2,0001., which by one of those contrivances, which in former times characterised the discretion of our ancestors, and which was somewhat rising again in the clauses of the Irish Tithe Bill, which proposes to appropriate 30/. per cent. of the property of the Church—gave the tithes of this parish to temporal purposes—tithes which were ap plicable in former times to the spiritual wants of the people—which realized a considerable sum, and produced 2,000/. Of this sum this individual received about 1501. The petitioner states that 3801. was advanced for the express purposes of suiting the convenience and consulting the taste of his predecessor, and that it was expended in erecting stables adapted for a gentleman who in dulged in fox-hunting, but which were wholly unnecessary for a person who had his duties to perform.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") This 3801. was charged upon the living and the petitioner was called upon to pay the interest an nually, and threatened with legal proceedings in default of payment. In what way, he would ask, was this gentleman to receive relief ? Was there any party in that House to whom this gentleman could appeal ? Would that House call the Commissioners of Queen Anne's bounty to account, and compel them to do justice in administering the funds committed to their charge ? 30,0001. were allowed to re main in the hands of the treasurer ; the treasurer became an insolvent, and only 8,0001. recovered from the •sure ties. The trustees afterwards agreed to make up the difference, but refused to pay the interest. The pe titioner called upon the House to protect him from paying a sum of money which had been misapplied to cer tain purposes, and in the way suggested by the petition. —The petition was then ordered to lie on the table. DUTY ON NEWSPAPERS. Mr. BUCKINGHAM presented a petition from Sheffield, praying for the entire abolition of the Duty on Newspapers. EMANCIPATION OF THE JEWS. The HoN. MEMBER also presented a petition from Sheffield, praying for the Emancipation of his Majesty's Jewish subjects. BLACKFRIARS BRIDGE. Mr. BA.RCL AY brought up a report from the Com mittee on Blackfriars Bridge. The Hon. Gentleman also presented a petition relating to Joint Stock Companies. Mr. R. STEWART brought up the Report of the Committee on the Dover Harbour Bill. Lord ACHESON presented several petitions from Down, in favour of the Amendments to be moved by the Hon. Member for Dundalk to the Irish Tithe Bill. Mr. R. STEWART brought up the Report of the Committee on Salaries and Expenses on the Church of Ireland Bill. Mr. FINN begged to ask the Noble Lord (Morpeth) whether any instructions had been given by the Irish Go vernment to suppress or conceal any of the outrages which were committed there, or whether the returns were in any way falsified? Colonel PERCEVAL hoped the Noble Lord would state whether the information which he had received was true, viz., that the Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors of Police in Ireland were ordered to send in their reports of out rages marked " private and confidential," and that then the returns were made up to suit the views of the Government. His object was that the returns should not be laid on the table, unless they were bona fide, and showed the real state of outrages in Ireland. Lord MORPETH said, as far as his knowledge went, there was not the slightest tinge of truth in the information of the Hon. and Gallant Memer.—(Cheers.) Colonel PERCEVAL—Are no outrages suppressed? Lord MORPETH—Most assuredly not.—(Cheers.) The NOBLE LORD then moved the Order of the Day, for the House going into Committee on the Irish Church Bill. Mr. S. CRAWFORD then presented several petitions, praying for the total abolition of The Honour able Member then rose to move the total extinc tion of tithes in Ireland, as prayed for by the peti tions he had just now presented, as well as upon many former occasions, and he hoped the House would indulge him with their attention while he supported his positiot.' with a few plain statements and facts. The only claim he could put forward for such indulgence was, that he brought forward his motion from an honest conviction that he was only performing his duty to his constituents. His motion was not to relieve the Catholic of a fractional part of this burden ; but whether they should he called upon to paY that charge which characterized them as slaves ?—(Hear.) It was a question whether man should be accountable to. his Maker for his religious principles, or whether be should forego those principles under the dictation of the State ?-- (Cheers.) When it was considered how the Protestant Church of Ireland became possessed of tithes, it would be found that the assumption of tithes of the Irish Church was nearly connected with the most atrocious of principles, a principle of persecution which at different periods of the world had been put in execution against Christians, and afterwards against Protestants. He alluded to the Acts passed in the reigns of James the First and Queen Elizabeth. The State had not the power to compel those who differed from the religion of the State to pay towards that religion ; but he would contend that, unless tithes were appropriated to the purposes for which they were originally intended, the State was not justified in levying those tithes. Then it had been said that estates lately purchased were purchased with the knowledge ,of the infliction of tithes and of the appropriation of tithes but he insisted that though a man might be under the necessity of purchssing property with a certain degree of evil attached to it, yet he was not to be• precluded from remedying that evil.—(Hear, hear.) Any man who purchased an estate was entitled to benefit him self by that purchase in the best way he could. Again, it had been said that Tithes were not paid by Irish tenants, but by the landlords. He wished to combat that prin ciple also.—(Hear, hear.) He wished it to be recollected that by the law of Ireland pasture lands were not liable for Tithes, that a great portion of the lands of Ireland were rented by the tenants at a value that was put upon them as pasture lands, and that the tenants were then induced, from the high price of corn, to cultivate those lands. Who, then, was it that ought to pay the tithes, the landlord or the tenant ? A great part of the land was in an unimpoverished and unimpaired state a few years ago. No doubt there had been since then extraordinary improvement on the produc tive qualities of the land within the last 20 or 30 years ; but he asked when the amount of tithes was thus raised from these improvements, did not the tenant pay them ? (Hear, hear.) Another position was this, that admitting that the landlord did originally set the land under an allow ance for tithes, it was subsequently underset to the peo ple, and would any man contend that an allowance had been made to these unfortunate undertakers ? It appeared, then,. the landlord paid a small portion of the tithes, and that the. great portion was paid by the population of the country.— (Hear, hear.) He should shortly allude to the Bill pro posed by his Majesty's Government. One proposition of the Bill was to sink a portion of the tithes :another proposition was to appropriate another portion of the tithes in a different manner ; and a third proposition was to force the tithes to be paid by the landlord. He insisted that this payment was merely nominal, as the Bill gave full right and title to the landlord, when he paid tithes, to enforce repayment in the same manner as rent was collected. So that, although tithes might be nominally imposed by the landlord, he asserted that they were actually paid by the people. One of the great evils that arose from the propositions of this Bill was, that it combined together rent and tithes. By combining a tax that was unjust, with a payment that was just, and for which the people received value, they would be induced to make opposition to that, as well as tithes, and a complete confusion of property would be the consequence.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") The effect of the Bill would be to put the landlords in the position of proctors for the Clergy ; and if other gentlemen desired to be placed in that position—if others conceived it to be a position of honour, he did not.—( Hear, hear.) The proposition might be exemplified this way—Suppose a mart paid 10d. tithes. By the present composition 3d. would be sunk—he would then pay 7d. From this sum one-seventh was appropriated to purposes of education, and the re maining six-tenths was paid by the Catholics of L-e -land, for the use and support of the Established Church_ He would wish to ask, would that satisfy the people of Ireland? He would refer the House to the numerous petitions presented by himself and other Hon. Members, and ask what was the demand of the petitioners ? Was it not in almost every instance for the total extinction of the tithes in name and in substance—for the principle that every man should pay for his own Church ? These senti ments were embodied in the petitions in such distinct terms as not to be mistaken. He would not trouble, the House with referring at length to these petitions,. but he would shortly state the prayer of one presented from the Protestant parish of Harmany and Ballilinney, in the county of Down, which stated that nothing short of a complete abolition of tithes, would secure tlie peace of the people—(Hear, hear)—restore the clergymen of the Established Church to the station in so ciety they should occupy, and unite all classes of his Ma jesty's subjects in one common bond of brotherly affection. Such were the sentiments of the Protestants of that parish—(Hear, hear, hear} —and he would now refer to a petition from the Rev. W. Handcock, rector of Drumcar, a clergyman of the Established Church, who stated, that so long as tithes were 'levied in Ireland it would have the effect of continuing agitation, perpe tuating sectarian strife, renewing scenes of slaughter, and extending the system of lawless terror. These were the sentiments of a clergyman of the Established Church, and he thought they were entitled to some weight.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.") He would now refer to the words of an eminent character, a Member of a for mer Parliament, which expressed the feelings of the people of Ireland. The Hon. Member then proceeded to read the passage, the substance of which was, that the amount of the tithes was not the real grievance, but • the conscientious feeling which prevented Dissenters from the Established Church contributing to its support. He would now refer to an authority far :greater than his own, and one which, from the station the individual held, must have its due weight ; he alluded to a letter which he had received two years ago from the Hon. and Learned Member for Kilkenny. The Hon. Member then proceeded to read the letter of Mr. O'Connell, which stated his opi nion, that so long as tithes existed, emancipation was but a mockery.—(Hear, from the Opposition, re-iterated by Mr. O'C.) He would now proceed to explain the resolution s which it was his intention to propose. The resolutions were as follows : " 1. That it is expedient that Tithes and all Compositions for Tithes in Ireland should cease, and be for ever extin guished ; compensation being first made for all vested inte rests, whether lay or ecclesiastical ; and that it is also expe dient that measures should be adopted to render the revenue of the Church Lands more productive, and more available for the support of the working Clergy of the Establishment ; and that all persons not in communion with the Established Church of Ireland should be relieved from all assessment for its sup. port. " 2. That it is expedient that the monies necessary for the aforesaid compensation should be advanced out of the public revenue, and afterwards repaid by instalments from the pro. cecds of a tax to be imposed on profit rents, suc h tax to cease and determine as soon as the said debt shall be discharged." He conceived that the tenants had most beneficial term s offered to them on which to purchase the fee under the Act of the 2d and 3d of William IV., and, in his opinion, an Act ought to be passed to render it compulsory on the tenant s to purchase the fee ; or that if they did not, they should be deprived of their property. He should also propos e n that a change should take place with res p ect to t he archbishops and bishops after the decease of the prese nt possessors. With respect t o the Archbishop he should pro pose that a sum not exceeding 2,000/. a y ear should be al. lowed, and for the Bishops a sum not excee din g 1,000/. a- year the surplus to be obt a i n ed by the foregoi n g resolution to he: applied in aid of th e stipends of the wor kin g clergy of the Established Ch urc h.—(Loud Cheers.) B y a praersiei mentary return in 1833 the number of acres of Bish op ' s lands were 669,247. In this return the Bishop r i c of Raphoe was not included. It was well known that some of the best lands in Ireland were held of the Ch, and if they w e re valued at one pound an acre, it won hurc ld pro duce 669,2471. a-year. The Hon. Member then went into a comparison of the value of Church property as it now stood, and what would be its value deducting the reserved rents. He would appeal to the representatives of Ireland u pon this question. He would refer to the statements and d e . clarations that had been made on vari ous Oc casions, by gentlemen who represented the liberal party of Ireland. He called upon them to declare to the House distinctly what it was the people of Ireland wished to have, and what it was that they would be satisfied with.—(Hear.) They had frequently stated that the people of Ireland would not be satisfied with any thing short of the total extinction of tithes, and how, he would ask, could they accept the Bill that had been offered to them by his'Majesty's Government ? Would the people of Ireland agree to sacrifice the principle upon which they demanded religious liberty, freedom o f conscience, and a right to worship their God as they thought fit? Lord MORPETH, after the full discussion and decided i fel tei to